• Send us a message

    Fill in our form and we'll get back to you as soon as possible

    Please enter name
    Please enter your telephone number
    Please enter your email address
    Please let us know which of offices would most convenient for you?
    Please enter the details of your enquiry
    Please enter the verification code
    Send us a message
  • Services for you
  • Services for business

High Court Stamps on Illicit Live Streaming of Boxing Matches Online

Unauthorised online streaming of major sporting events, depriving organisers of their legitimate revenues, is ever on the increase. However, as a case in which the High Court came to the aid of a boxing match promoter showed, the law is far from powerless to deal with the problem.

The bouts organised by the promoter that were most popular with boxing fans were televised under an exclusive deal with a broadcaster on a pay-per-view basis. Honest punters paid about £20 to watch a match, but the system was being circumvented by a number of online servers that live streamed footage to fans' screens for free or at a much reduced price. Such servers were operating in wholesale breach of both the promoter's and the broadcaster's intellectual property rights.

After the promoter launched proceedings, the Court issued an injunction requiring the six main UK Internet service providers (ISPs) to take measures to block, or at least impede, their customers' access to infringing servers during matches. The exact means by which that objective will be achieved was kept confidential in order to discourage counter-measures.

The order, which is to last for two years, provides for close monitoring of streaming websites in the seven-day period prior to each match. The promoter is required to notify the ISPs of any relevant match at least four weeks in advance. The Court had previously made similar orders in respect of football matches that had achieved considerable success in preventing illicit streaming.

In ruling that the injunction was proportionate, the Court noted that steps would be taken to ensure that free access to the Internet would be blocked only so far as necessary. The order created no barriers to legitimate trade and, to the extent that it would interfere with Internet access, it was justified by the legitimate aim of preventing large-scale infringement of the promoter's and the broadcaster's rights.

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.